Agnostic & Non-Theistic ID Proponents/Sympathizers – Speak Up
|May 11, 2011||Posted by nullasalus under Intelligent Design|
Intelligent Design is often accused of being entirely driven by religious motivations. I don’t think there’s anything about ID itself that warrants this conclusion, but I do think it’s obvious that ID’s supporters by and large tend to be religious. Even I’m a religious theist (Catholic, though a poor one by most standards), and some, though not all, of my ID interest is spurred by metaphysical considerations. At the same time, I see nothing in ID that mandates a person being religious, even theistic in the common sense of the term.
Which brings me to this thread. I’d like to invite an agnostics or non-theists who are either ID proponents, or are ID sympathetic, to speak up here. In fact, I’m going to lay out a few ground rules that I hope all will follow, in the hopes of keeping this thread particularly on-target.
* No barbs related to religious belief or theism, pro- or anti-. That means no proselytizing in either direction, no insults about anyone’s religious beliefs or lack thereof. In addition, let’s keep this respectful – assuming any non-theists or agnostics speak up.
* Again, the focus here is on ID sympathetic or proponents who are also agnostics or non-theists. Agnostic or non-theist ID critics, this isn’t the thread for you to lay out what you believe or don’t believe. Chances are I’m well aware anyway.
* Feel free to lay out what convinces or appeals to you about ID, what ID inferences you make or have made, etc. If you want to go further than ID and speculate on who or what you think the designer may be, feel free.
* If you’re an agnostic or a non-theist who thinks they may be ID sympathetic, but isn’t sure (For instance, you believe in design but also common descent and suspect this combination means you’re not
If any additional clarification is needed, just ask away. I’m honestly curious if – and frankly, hopeful that – some appropriate responses pop up here.